Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Amaral, Rui L.
Publication Date: 2020
Other Authors: Neto, Diogo M., Wagre, Dipak, Santos, Abel D., Oliveira, Marta C.
Format: Article
Language: eng
Source: Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
Download full: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475
https://doi.org/10.3390/met10121595
Summary: The validation of numerical models requires the comparison between numerical and experimental results, which has led to the development of benchmark tests in order to achieve a wider participation. In the sheet metal-forming research field, the benchmarks proposed by the Numisheet conference series are a reference, because they always represented a challenge for the numerical codes within the state of the art in the modeling of sheet metal forming. From the challenges proposed along the series of Numisheet benchmarks, the springback prediction has been frequently incorporated, and is still a motivation for the development and testing of accurate modeling strategies. In fact, springback prediction poses many challenges, because it is strongly influenced by numerical parameters such as the type, order, and integration scheme of the finite elements adopted, as well as the shape and size of the finite element mesh, in addition to the constitutive model. Moreover, its measurement also requires the definition of a fixture that should not influence the actual springback and the proper definition of the measurement locations and directions. This is the subject of this contribution, which analyzes the benchmark focused on springback prediction, proposed by the Numisheet 2016 committee. Numerical results are obtained with two di erent codes and comparisons are performed between both numerical and experimental data. The di erences between numerical results are mainly dictated by the ambiguous definition of boundary conditions. The analysis of numerical and experimental springback results should rely on the use of global planes to ensure the objectivity and simplicity in the comparison. Therefore, the analysis gives an insight into issues related to the comparison of results in complex geometries involving springback, which in turn suggests some recommendations for similar future benchmarks.
id RCAP_cb348d95bb71b70bde56fc8a2cd7c975
oai_identifier_str oai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/101475
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository_id_str https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/7160
spelling Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarksexperimental benchmarksfinite element modelingnumerical validationsheet metal formingspringbackThe validation of numerical models requires the comparison between numerical and experimental results, which has led to the development of benchmark tests in order to achieve a wider participation. In the sheet metal-forming research field, the benchmarks proposed by the Numisheet conference series are a reference, because they always represented a challenge for the numerical codes within the state of the art in the modeling of sheet metal forming. From the challenges proposed along the series of Numisheet benchmarks, the springback prediction has been frequently incorporated, and is still a motivation for the development and testing of accurate modeling strategies. In fact, springback prediction poses many challenges, because it is strongly influenced by numerical parameters such as the type, order, and integration scheme of the finite elements adopted, as well as the shape and size of the finite element mesh, in addition to the constitutive model. Moreover, its measurement also requires the definition of a fixture that should not influence the actual springback and the proper definition of the measurement locations and directions. This is the subject of this contribution, which analyzes the benchmark focused on springback prediction, proposed by the Numisheet 2016 committee. Numerical results are obtained with two di erent codes and comparisons are performed between both numerical and experimental data. The di erences between numerical results are mainly dictated by the ambiguous definition of boundary conditions. The analysis of numerical and experimental springback results should rely on the use of global planes to ensure the objectivity and simplicity in the comparison. Therefore, the analysis gives an insight into issues related to the comparison of results in complex geometries involving springback, which in turn suggests some recommendations for similar future benchmarks.2020info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttps://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475https://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475https://doi.org/10.3390/met10121595eng2075-4701Amaral, Rui L.Neto, Diogo M.Wagre, DipakSantos, Abel D.Oliveira, Marta C.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiainstacron:RCAAP2025-02-19T17:42:53Zoai:estudogeral.uc.pt:10316/101475Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireinfo@rcaap.ptopendoar:https://opendoar.ac.uk/repository/71602025-05-29T05:50:53.653177Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologiafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
title Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
spellingShingle Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
Amaral, Rui L.
experimental benchmarks
finite element modeling
numerical validation
sheet metal forming
springback
title_short Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
title_full Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
title_fullStr Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
title_full_unstemmed Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
title_sort Issues on the Correlation between Experimental and Numerical Results in Sheet Metal Forming Benchmarks
author Amaral, Rui L.
author_facet Amaral, Rui L.
Neto, Diogo M.
Wagre, Dipak
Santos, Abel D.
Oliveira, Marta C.
author_role author
author2 Neto, Diogo M.
Wagre, Dipak
Santos, Abel D.
Oliveira, Marta C.
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Amaral, Rui L.
Neto, Diogo M.
Wagre, Dipak
Santos, Abel D.
Oliveira, Marta C.
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv experimental benchmarks
finite element modeling
numerical validation
sheet metal forming
springback
topic experimental benchmarks
finite element modeling
numerical validation
sheet metal forming
springback
description The validation of numerical models requires the comparison between numerical and experimental results, which has led to the development of benchmark tests in order to achieve a wider participation. In the sheet metal-forming research field, the benchmarks proposed by the Numisheet conference series are a reference, because they always represented a challenge for the numerical codes within the state of the art in the modeling of sheet metal forming. From the challenges proposed along the series of Numisheet benchmarks, the springback prediction has been frequently incorporated, and is still a motivation for the development and testing of accurate modeling strategies. In fact, springback prediction poses many challenges, because it is strongly influenced by numerical parameters such as the type, order, and integration scheme of the finite elements adopted, as well as the shape and size of the finite element mesh, in addition to the constitutive model. Moreover, its measurement also requires the definition of a fixture that should not influence the actual springback and the proper definition of the measurement locations and directions. This is the subject of this contribution, which analyzes the benchmark focused on springback prediction, proposed by the Numisheet 2016 committee. Numerical results are obtained with two di erent codes and comparisons are performed between both numerical and experimental data. The di erences between numerical results are mainly dictated by the ambiguous definition of boundary conditions. The analysis of numerical and experimental springback results should rely on the use of global planes to ensure the objectivity and simplicity in the comparison. Therefore, the analysis gives an insight into issues related to the comparison of results in complex geometries involving springback, which in turn suggests some recommendations for similar future benchmarks.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475
https://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475
https://doi.org/10.3390/met10121595
url https://hdl.handle.net/10316/101475
https://doi.org/10.3390/met10121595
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 2075-4701
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
instname:FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
collection Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositórios Científicos de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (RCAAP) - FCCN, serviços digitais da FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
repository.mail.fl_str_mv info@rcaap.pt
_version_ 1833602492566339584